JK Rowling Cancellation

TLDR:

Cancel culture is shit, people can like what they want. Death of the author exists for a reason. The news needs to find better things to do (I’m talking about all news programs- they’re all succumb to clickbait bullshit.

Long entry

There’s really no reason to act superior about buying or not buying any product- all products or people producing products have some shady shit happening in the background and people simply can’t be aware of EVERYTHING. You just can’t blame people not knowing about the horrors of nesquik when they’re busy studying and learning about the Problems happening in Chile. Everyone gives up and eats McDonalds sometimes because some day you just don’t want to/can’t spend more then a dollar for lunch.

It’s important to be a responsible consumer but you can’t reasonably be responsible for everything you consume- there’s simply too much. Do what you can when you can and remember that sometimes you just >want to be happy and not give a f< Wich again sometimes means going to McDs.

Twitter is a trash fire. Everyone knows this. They cancel people all the time and it’s healthier to just ignore both sides because they’re both trash at the end of the day. Everyone looking for clout aren’t doing it because they care about you- they just want the clout. Keep your friends close and don’t let friendships end over bullshit like “you dare buy the new Harry Potter book after what JK said??” She is not the same person she was when she first wrote the books and she won’t be the same person she is in 10 years (both in a spiritual level but also on a molecular level ) life is short- we don’t need to be stressed out 24/7 because of nonsense like someone said something and now we can’t buy things even tho the things we’re buying have nothing to do with the what the person is talking about.

Like what you like. But responsibly when you can. Live long and prosper.

Jk got canceled on Twitter- the sun also rose again today- no suprises.

• cancel culture isn't real. jk rowling is richer than you will ever be and that will literally never be untrue. she still has exactly as much pull as she always has, up to and including easily finding a publisher for her new explicitly anti-trans book
• the hatred is pretty well-deserved. her positions, on top of being nonsense, are extremely harmful and lead to actual death and suffering of real people. she will never understand this because she is now (and has always been) a horrible person
• even if we somehow managed to "cancel" her, as in pressure her to never release anything again, we would lose nothing of value. she's a mediocre writer on a good day and the only thing she ever made with any modicum of cultural value is already finished. at any time, she could take her ghoulish amount of money and retire on an island somewhere, living in not just comfort but luxury for the rest of her life, bothering no one with her terrible ideas. but she has not and will not
• also yeah like everyone else said twitter is like the worst place on the internet that isn't openly a white nationalist forum or something so I would not be too concerned with what goes on there

I don't give two craps about Harry Potter. Or the author. Or what people on Twitter think.

BUT

I reserve the right to like what I want, when I want. I don't owe anyone but myself an explanation.

Here's my issue with the term "Cancel Culture" - it's not an actual ideology, it's an accusation, there's no group of people who have identified themselves as "Cancelers" and so there's no actual group of people who can defend it. The term is only ever used to identify "other people," usually those the speaker disagrees with, and when that's the case, the phrase only ever has negative connotations. It's like the difference between "Social Justice Warrior" and "Civil Rights Activist" - one is an insult created by opponents to an ideology, the other is a self-identification for people who can describe their own set of beliefs and values. You can discuss things with a "Civil Rights Activist" and find other like-minded activists with fairly consistent worldviews - you can't do the same with an SJW, because the accuser is the one who decides what an SJW is.

So that's my issue with using the phrase "Cancel Culture" - everyone has a different idea of what it means, which means the people arguing on both sides are not agreeing on what they disagree on. The way I see it, there's no difference between "Cancel Culture" and just the generally human behavior of "I don't want to associate with something I disagree with" - and that's been going on forever, including the extension of that philosophy to "and I don't like it when other people associate with it either."

Anyway, I don't see JK Rowling as aligning with my views on trans issues, so I'm not too keen on supporting her. It's a bit easier for me though, I was never that huge a Harry Potter fan so I was probably not going to be too invested in her stuff regardless. But I do believe her past actions and her most recent book have made it abundantly clear that she has a pretty consistent view of trans issues that I would fully understand people finding reprehensible. I see no issue with people choosing not to support a creator who actively supports things they fundamentally disagree with.

I just want to second what some people have already stated... cancel culture is another term thrown around so much that it has losts its meaning, same as "SJW" or "problematic".
Dogpiling on marginalized creators - who are usually fanfic writers or twitter artists without a huge following - is cancel culture and yes it is bad. Calling out a multi-millionaire, who will continue producing content and making money regardless, on their shitty views, is not.

I will never support anything JKR makes or says again because it doesn't sit right with me personally, but I'm not letting her kill my fond memories of growing up with her series. It is deeply flawed, but I respect what it has done for children's literature and also was one of the books that inspired me to write when I was a kid. And since twitter is obviously viewing everything in a very black-and-white mindset, I've seen takes on there that go basically "You HAVE to stop liking HP it's a gross shitty series!!!", which I strongly disagree with - I can be aware the creator is a shitty person and still enjoy the good parts of what they created, and I don't owe anyone an explanation.
/excuses myself out of this thread before it becomes a dumpster fire

I definitely know what you mean.

My opinion is that her statements are problematic at best (especially her recent novel) and by this point she's a bit of a waste of skin and needs to get in the sea and leave us all alone.

However. I still love HP as a setting and a series, I still identify as a Hufflepuff (fight me), and still get giddy and nostalgic whenever I read the books or watch the main movie series, especially the earlier ones.

This is definitely a case of separating the art from the artist.

I personally am not a fan of her. I liked the first Harry Potter movie but I never felt the need to watch any of the sequels or read any of the books. With that being said, I don't believe in the 'cancel culture' as I don't believe Twitter is real life. The problem is when companies treat Twitter like real life and change things based on what Twitter thinks.

Also, I agree about separating art from the artist. If something is good, it is good. And if something is bad, it is bad. The creator's bigotry or lack of does not have anything to do with that. I will take a good product over a bad product regardless of who makes them. Pretty sure lots of the stuff I purchase are made in China lol

Agreed on most folks in here about cancel culture. JK has not been cancelled. She has a massive platform, she just had a(n incredibly transphobic) book published, and she's in the news almost weekly for saying something harmful. If she were cancelled, we wouldn't have this thread. However, attacking people for liking her work is directing anger toward sometimes vulnerable people, when you should be pulling support from JK instead.

Now, as for separating the art from the artist: that's an easy thing to do when the artist hasn't told you in particular that you don't matter. It's a priviledge!

But, in my opinion, it's impossible to separate JK's problematic beliefs from Harry Potter. The entire species of elves who are happy to be slaves; the hook-nosed wealth-hoarding goblins, and the transphobic depiction of a trans woman to name a couple.

Every time she pops up in the news it seems like way too many people are wringing their hands and trying to figure out how they can still enjoy Harry Potter, when, let's face it, better media exists. Sometimes it's alright to put those Griffindor scarves in the closet and forget about em. It just seems like the very least you could do to let your trans friends know you care about them more than a fandom.

But I won't come after you for it.

A lot of people forget that "death of the author" is a tool of literary criticism, it's not a tool for sorting out how you feel for something you used to love. Should you still love it? Should you stop loving it? Are you allowed to look fondly upon the memories? It's like watching someone come to terms with an abusive parent. It's like people think "death of the author" means "This person is dead to me, and can no longer hurt me."

But rewriting history isn't the way to go. Coming to a more nuanced understanding, that's how you do it.

As a trans person, I will say, PLEASE do not harass people who still like Harry Potter. Especially fans who are kids or on the spectrum.

I also don’t like how people are writing sexist and death threats about JK Rowling. I would prefer just unfollowing and ignoring her. This lady has dealt with harsh critics, I remember when conservative groups would burn her books. Harassing her is not going to change her mind.

I'm more curious about what she wrote that made her anti-trans.

There are videos on it all over the place breaking it down. But she also has a history of retweeting and liking racist, transphobic and generally vile tweets and then claiming it was a mistake and suing anyone who reports it, as I mentioned above.

And most notable for me isn't just her being "misinformed" or "having a different opinion" but the lies. Like about Maya who "was fired for saying biological sex is real". No. Her contract wasn't renewed when it ran out because she was making her work place hostile and being rude in public about clients. She took it to employment tribunal and was told (I'm paraphrasing) "your opinions aside, we cannot force a company to renew your contract at the end of its term". But JK insists "she was fired for saying biological sex is real".

That doesn't answer my question, what did she do or say that is causing this?

This whole thing reminds me of the thing with Orson Scott Card, who wrote a very important sci-fi book but who's also a raging homophobe. And the book, Ender's Game, has important things to say about war and violence and so on. And the homophobia is what it is.

This is what I mean about nuanced views. In this hyper-informed era you're going to have a bad time unless you accept that people can be very wise and very stupid and that you can love them and hate them at the same time.

I think that claiming an author's works should no longer be read or appreciated because of unrelated statements is a bit silly.

If someone's a serial killer (and this is a veeery extreme comparison, she's no murderer) then that serial killer should be in jail, but if that serial killer writes a ten part epic about a magic goose. you have every right to enjoy that ten part epic (and you might get some social/cultural understandings reading it, knowing that the writer's a killer, since that's probably reflected in their writing, or surprisingly unnoticable)

As for the Death of the Author thing, I think it's fair to say Rowling was actively preaching tolerance. Heck, even the biggest self centered morons will still try to preach good values, because they rarely realise they're breaking those morals themselves. If anything, it's interesting to read a work from an author whilst trying to understand how their world view is slanted. People with bad ideas get those ideas from somewhere after all.

People still enjoy Lovecraft's works, and he is very openly racist and idiotic in those, but it's interesting to see how this sad reclusive man from the days of old would look at the world and see fear in every corner.

So regardless of what you think of Rowling herself, there can still be value in reading what she wrote (unless you're bored by what she writes, or just too uncomfortable to enjoy it)

I've seen Rowling say some dumb things, but nobody should have their writing license revoked for being ignorant or bad at arguing.